I have a bit of a gripe with this industry, at least the way that I see it. I recently learned Stone Age and Carson City (I haven't played any other worker placement games, so I cannot comment on Caylus, Agricola, and the like). Both of these games, on their first play in a group of newcomers, had at least one critical rule misunderstood.

I understand that there is an aversion to making games "language dependent," but the fact of the matter is these mistakes would not have been made if words had been written on game board - at all. Both games are primarily visual, using arbitrary symbols to represent critical game concepts instead of words to define them. Obviously, you have to parse through the rulebook to figure out WHAT the symbols MEAN and the rules surrounding them, taking more time than if the actual rule or concept was shown on the board.

It is nice to have stuff explained in text on cards and boards but if the game doesn't really need much text it will be cheaper to produce if you can remove the text from as many components as possible. Caylus also uses symbols instead of text.

Le Havre got some of text on the board, you don't have to look anything up in the rules once you know the game. For example below the deck of special buildings it says what each player starts with. Agricola got a ton of text on the cards.

To me, a 'language independent' game means a game that I can play with my non-gamer friends the moment it hits distribution, without the need to wait for a translation. Case in point, Puerto Rico, a game that I'm not willing to play anymore with hardcore gamers, has been translated in Italian only this year, seven years after its publication.